{"id":33850,"date":"2000-03-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2000-03-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000"},"modified":"2017-11-14T11:26:53","modified_gmt":"2017-11-14T05:56:53","slug":"high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000","title":{"rendered":"High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Delhi High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 2000 IIIAD Delhi 857, 85 (2000) DLT 355, 2000 (56) DRJ 201<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: V Sen<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: V Sen<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>ORDER<\/p>\n<p> Vikramajit Sen, J. <\/p>\n<p>1.     This application for temporary injunction has been filed in a suit for the Specific Performance of land situated in Khasra Nos. 314(4-16),  313(4-16),  315(4-16)  situated in village Shahroorpur,  District  Mehrauli,  New Delhi. This agreement based on a Receipt dated 22.9.1991 has allegedly been signed  by  Defendant Nos.1, 3, 9, 10 and 11. In this  very  suit  Specific Performance of another piece of land has also been claimed on the basis  of another  Receipt dated 3.10.1991. The land mentioned in the second  Receipt is  situated in Khasra No.311(4-16), 312(1-4) situated in the same  village<br \/>\nand allegedly executed by Defendant Nos.13, 14 and 15. There is no document witnessing  any Agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant Nos. 2, 4, 5,  6, 7, 8 and 12 but they have all been imp leaded in the suit.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.   Learned  counsel for Defendants had raised an objection to  the  maintainability of the suit on the ground of mis-joinder of parties as well  as mis-joinder of cause of action. Prima facie both these objections are  well<br \/>\nfounded  but  in the view which I have taken, I need not  expand  on  these objctions.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.   As  has  been stated above, the suit is predicated  on  two  documents styled  as  Receipts. It is the contention of the learned counsel  for  the plaintiff that the contents of these documents should be read  holistically and  meaningfully and that merely because these are styled as Receipts,  it would not necessarily lead to the conclusion that an Agreement to Sell  had not been entered into. To this extent learned counsel for the Plaintiff  is no doubt correct. In all such cases a duty is cast on the Court to  examine the  document  in question and to arrive at a conclusion as to  whether  it contains  all  the necessary concomitants of an Agreement.  In  M\/s.  Nanak Builders and Investors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Vinod Kumar Alag, AIR 1991 Delhi  315, Arun Kumar, J., had made the following observations:\n<\/p>\n<p>     &#8220;Mere heading or title of a document cannot deprive the  document of its real nature. It is the substance which has to be seen  and not  the  form. Where the document acknowledging the  receipt  of earnest  money towards the sale of plot of land contains all  the essential and basic ingredients required for an agreement to sell the same is signed by both the vendor and the vendee and is  also witnessed  by  an attesting witness and it does not  contain  any mention  that  a formal agreement of sale will be  executed,  the fact that the vendee parts with a substantial amount in favour of the vendor shows that the parties have reached a consensus on the various  terms  of the arrangement between them  meaning  thereby<br \/>\n     that  a  contract has been arrived at, and,  merely  because  the  document is titled as a receipt, it does not render the  document as  to mere receipt. The document is a contract which is  capable  of being specifically enforced.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>4.   Similar  observations are also contained in the order of  S.K.Mahajan, J. in Vinod Saluja Vs. Sita Rani, . Applying the ratio set down in the above judgment to the facts of the present case I am  satisfied that  there is complete failure on the part of the plaintiff  to  establish the existence of a prima facie case in his favour.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.   In  respect of the first Receipt dated 22.9.1991 the total  consideration is Rs. 24,50,000 and admittedly only Rs. 21.000\/- has been paid. After witnessing the Receipt of this payment this very document mentions that  at the time of the &#8220;Agreement&#8221; a further sum of Rs. 3,00,000\/- would be  paid. This sentence by itself is sufficient to non-suit the plaintiff. It is  the normal practice in all transactions pertaining to the sale of property that Earnest Money representing approximately then per cent of the sale  consideration  is paid\/received. Although this would not lead to the  inescapable<br \/>\nconclusion that every contract where a payment to this extent has been made is  liable  for Specific Performance, the non receipt of  an  approximately similar sum would definitely be indicative that an Agreement was yet to  be arrived  at.  This is in fact what the Receipt  specifically  contemplates. Paraphrased, it states that when an Agreement to Sell is entered into a sum of  Rs.3,00,000\/-  would be paid. The next sentence states  that  the  deal would  be  finalised  within a period of two months.  The  Receipt  itself, therefore,  is  determinative  of the fact that no  `Agreement&#8217;  had  taken<br \/>\nplace.  The  observations  of Arun Kumar, J, in M\/s.  Nanak  Builders  case (supra) that the document relied upon should not contain any mention that a formal  Agreement to Sell is to be executed, is most significant. There  is no averment in the plaint that an oral Agreement actually took place  after the execution of Receipt even though an allegation to this effect has  been made  in the notice dated 18.3.1992 issued by Shri L.S. Rana,  Advocate  on behalf  of Plaintiff. I am compelled to conclude that the parties had  only agreed  to enter into an Agreement, and in these circumstances  a  contract<br \/>\nwas yet to come into being.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.   The position is similar in the case of second Receipt dated 3.10.1991. A  total  sale  consideration  is  Rs.11,87,500  and  the  amount  paid  is Rs.15,000\/- to each of the three Defendants. This document further mentions<br \/>\nthat  upon receipt of the sum equivalent to ten per cent of the total  sale consideration, the executants would be ready to enter into an Agreement. As in  the case of the first Receipt, a perusal of this document itself  would lead  to the conclusion that only an inchoate understanding, not an  agreement, had been arrived at. The consensus ad idem was that on receipt of the payment of the larger sum of approximately ten per cent an Agreement was to be executed. On such documentation, it would not be possible to hold that a prima facie case had been made out. As has been laid down in Mayawanti  Vs. Kaushalya  Devi,  , &#8220;burden of showing the  stipulations  and terms  of the contract and that the minds were ad idem, lies on the  Plaintiff. If the stipulations and terms are uncertain there can be no  specific performance, for there is no contract at all. Where there are negotiations, the  Court  has to determined at what point, if at all,  the  parties  have reached  agreement&#8221;.  There can be no manner of doubt that in  the  present case the Agreement was yet to be reached.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.   These considerations, to my mind, are sufficient reasons for rejecting the  application.  Learned Counsel for the plaintiff  had  emphasised  that subsequent  to  the  execution  of the two Receipts, a  total  sum  of  Rs. 4,45,960.62  had also been paid by the Plaintiff to the Revenue  Collector, Tis  Hazari, being the amount received by the Defendant in respect  of  the land  agreed to be sold to the Plaintiff. This is clearly a unilateral  act of the Plaintiff, since the learned counsel for the Plaintiff has not  been able  to show any document which would indicate that this payment was  made<br \/>\non the request or behest of any of the Defendants.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.   The  interim  orders are recalled and the  application  is  dismissed. Since substantial sums of money now stand deposited by the Plaintiff, I  am desisting from imposing any costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Delhi High Court High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000 Equivalent citations: 2000 IIIAD Delhi 857, 85 (2000) DLT 355, 2000 (56) DRJ 201 Author: V Sen Bench: V Sen ORDER Vikramajit Sen, J. 1. This application for temporary injunction has been filed in a suit for the Specific [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-33850","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2000-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-11-14T05:56:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000\",\"datePublished\":\"2000-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-14T05:56:53+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000\"},\"wordCount\":1234,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000\",\"name\":\"High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2000-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-14T05:56:53+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2000-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-11-14T05:56:53+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000","datePublished":"2000-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-14T05:56:53+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000"},"wordCount":1234,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000","name":"High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2000-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-14T05:56:53+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-way-farms-vs-sh-chinta-ram-ors-on-3-march-2000#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"High Way Farms vs Sh. Chinta Ram &amp; Ors. on 3 March, 2000"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33850","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=33850"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33850\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33850"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33850"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33850"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}